California General Election 2026
Guía electoral
The Peace and Freedom Party is committed to socialism, democracy, ecology, feminism and racial equality. We represent the working class, those without capital in a capitalist society. We organize toward a world where cooperation replaces competition, a world where all people are well fed, clothed and housed; where all women and men have equal status; where all individuals may freely endeavor to fulfill their own talents and desires; a world of freedom and peace where every community retains its cultural integrity and lives with all others in harmony.

California State Assembly · District 59
Candidate slogan as printed: “Community over Corporations!”

California State Assembly · District 63
Candidate slogan as printed: "For working people, not billionaires"
Recomendación: votar sí
Recomendación: votar sí
Prop 3 would make permanent the higher income tax rates on the top brackets that fund education. It affects only single filers earning at least $361,000 or joint filers earning at least $721,000, with 89% of revenue allocated to K–12 schools and 11% to community colleges.
Recomendación: votar sí
Would allow the state and local governments to create programs that provide candidates with public funds under spending limits and eligibility rules. It repeals the ban on public financing of campaigns, enacted in 1988.
Recomendación: votar sí
Would change the way recalled state officers are replaced. The office would be left vacant until it is filled according to state law, in the same way other vacancies are filled: by succession, by appointment or by a later special election, depending on the office.
Recomendación: votar no
Would establish a second mortgage homebuyer program for some homebuyers on newly constructed homes only and issue $25 billion in bonds to fund the program. These bonds would be paid off by the homebuyers, not the taxpayers. We are opposed because new home construction often promotes suburban sprawl, impacting the environment in several ways, including using up open space and necessitating longer commutes. Prop 37 does not limit the cost of the new homes.
Recomendación: votar no
Would issue bonds to establish an Immunology and Immunotherapy Research Institute affiliated with the University of California. The bonds would be paid off by taxpayers and the research used by drug companies to develop therapies with high price tags. We need a progressive way to fund the research, public ownership of pharmaceutical production, and universal free health care.
Recomendación: votar no
Would require voters to present government-issued identification and require election officials to use government data to confirm voter citizenship and report verification rates. There is little to no evidence that non-citizens vote. The “government data” is full of errors and will be used to keep working class and minority citizens from voting.
Recomendación: votar sí
Prop 40 would levy a one-time 5% tax on the accumulated wealth of billionaires in California to fund health care programs, such as Medi-Cal, which have faced cuts by the Trump administration.
Recomendación: votar no
Placed on the ballot by billionaires, these measures would cancel the billionaires’ tax even if proposition 40 passes.
Recomendación: votar no
Placed on the ballot by billionaires, these measures would cancel the billionaires’ tax even if proposition 40 passes.
Recomendación: votar no
Would require supermajorities for local initiatives to enact taxes whose proceeds are dedicated to a specified purpose. Supermajority requirements are undemocratic.
Recomendación: votar sí
Would prohibit federally-qualified healthcare clinics from spending less than 90% of their annual revenue on mission-related purposes. It is sponsored by unions of healthcare workers and opposed by hospital management.
Recomendación: votar no
Proposition 45 changes the California Environmental Quality Act, taking a sledgehammer to environmental review of and public comments about most land use and public works projects.
Would increase the Budget Stabilization Account (BSA) (the Rainy Day Fund) cap from 10% of general fund revenue to 20% and exclude deposits into the BSA from the Gann limit.* We need a mechanism to even out revenue for state funded programs in years that rich people’s incomes from investments is lower because of stock market fluctuations. And sheltering deposits into the rainy day fund from the Gann limit is a step in the right direction.